The supposedly best book of the 21st century so far.
Wha does /lit/ think of it? And what books, if any, are more deserving of the title?
>>7722172
I genuinely wish I could physically hurt people who pretend to like this book. Seeing others act like it's intelligent and praiseworthy book when all commonsense and knowledge of literature tells me otherwise drives me fucking nuts. If I could just ignore the posturing pseuds I'd be fine, but they're constantly invading the websites I visit, the comment sections of articles I read and the journals I occasionally browse.
Why are trying so hard to force him? Why are so many people falling for it? I can't think of an author that the American academy has recently tried to prop up who is worse than Diaz. Maybe Coates. Am I taking crazy pills? Are people really this superficial that they read "MIT professor" and automatically assume 'genius'? Are they this blind to the social ideologies and pandering that rule over our culture?
My conclusion is that some of them are aware of the obvious political bias, but they enjoy being pandered to and actively encourage it. Others like OP are probably unaware but still base their opinion off it based on its inclusion in obnoxious listicles like "The Guardian's Sixty-Five Best Books of the Past Fourteen Months According to our Outspoken Literary Critic of Color."
>>7722208
why so grumpy?
>>7722208
literally not a single reason why you think it's bad.
>>7722587
not him, but the main reason is probably that it's a shitty, garbage book, because Junot Diaz is a shitty, garbage writer, because he thinks mostly within the bounds of political correctness
It's bloated, and to entangled in the politics of it's time, but it's not a bad read. I think the main issue is this: It's really difficult to see what the defining fiction of an epoch is without the power of retrospect. Contemporary readers really want to find a book that can act as the voice for their generation. They want to know what books of our literary era should look like. I think this yearning is what leads people to praise this book in the way this >>7722208 anon describes. It has really obvious emotions and references to make the reader say "someone get's me". However I think that the same could be said of infinite jest (although I do think that book has more subtext (if a bit obnoxious at times)).
Why does he look like he's molded in plastic and someone has squiggled on his face with a sharpie?
Wonder how many books are the supposedly best book of the 21st century so far. Probably thousands.
>write highschool-tier magical realism bildungsroman
>run every 10th word through google translate
Congratulations you are now poet laureate.
>>7722643
2smug4u
>>7722993
You forgot
>carpet-bomb your narrative with references to low-brow nerd culture.
>>7722993
>>write highschool-tier magical realism bildungsroman
>>run every 10th word through google translate
>Congratulations you are now poet laureate.
under rated post
>black lives matter
>comic books, lord of the rings, akira!! lol xD
>weeaboos are people too
>what if Fantastical Realism was a girl...
At least it's brief
>>7722643
hourly reminder that this buffoon won a MacArthur fellowship
>>7722208
what are you thoughts on IJ? genuinely curious
>>7722172
The Great Gatsby
Wait...
>>7723048
>what if Fantastical Realism was a girl...
i wasn't ready for that
Oscar Wao sounds like a horrendous novel, but I do actually really like Diaz's short stories (except for all the hispanic lingo he drops to try and sound legit).
>American Murakami seasoned with the trends of social justice and "cool" nerd culture.
I think Ill never read this
>>7722606
>why do you think it's bad?
>because it's garbage lol
...
>>7724022
>American Murakami
That'd be a compliment, I doubt this guy is anywhere near as good at what he does.
>>7724112
seems legit
It just occurred to me that you guys might be shitting on this only because it won the Pulitzer and you want to fuck with newfags who are thinking about reading it
>>7724349
Have you read it?
>>7724380
I'm a newfag who's thinking about reading it
>>7724388
Read it, it's shit. Not because he doesn't know what he's doing, but because he tries to include his shitty knowledge of history, anthropology, and culture into his writing. His prose isn't that bad, in fact, it can be pretty good at times. The issue is that you think you're reading satire, but then he pulls back and you realize he is just a legitimate idiot.
Instead of just shitting on him, what new novels are better?
